Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26855769›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2016

Sperm performance in conspecific and heterospecific female fluid.

Emily R A Cramer, Even Stensrud, Gunnhild Marthinsen, Silje Hogner, Lars Erik Johannessen, Terje Laskemoen, Marie-Christine Eybert, Tore Slagsvold, Jan T Lifjeld, Arild Johnsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The role of female reproductive fluid in sperm competition.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Emily R A CramerNatural History Museum University of Oslo PO Box 1172 Blindern 0318 Oslo Norway.
Even StensrudNatural History Museum University of Oslo PO Box 1172 Blindern 0318 Oslo Norway.
Gunnhild MarthinsenNatural History Museum University of Oslo PO Box 1172 Blindern 0318 Oslo Norway.
Silje HognerNatural History Museum University of Oslo PO Box 1172 Blindern 0318 Oslo Norway.
Lars Erik JohannessenNatural History Museum University of Oslo PO Box 1172 Blindern 0318 Oslo Norway.
Terje LaskemoenNatural History Museum University of Oslo PO Box 1172 Blindern 0318 Oslo Norway.
Marie-Christine EybertEA7316 Université de Rennes I 263 Av. du Général Leclerc 35042 Rennes Cedex France.
Tore SlagsvoldDepartment of Biosciences Center for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES) University of Oslo PO Box 1066 Blindern 0316 Oslo Norway.
Jan T LifjeldNatural History Museum University of Oslo PO Box 1172 Blindern 0318 Oslo Norway.
Arild JohnsenNatural History Museum University of Oslo PO Box 1172 Blindern 0318 Oslo Norway.
University of Oslo · NOUniversité de Rennes · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Divergent sexual selection within allopatric populations may result in divergent sexual phenotypes, which can act as reproductive barriers between populations upon secondary contact. This hypothesis has been most tested on traits involved in precopulatory sexual selection, with less work focusing on traits that act after copulation and before fertilization (i.e., postcopulatory prezygotic traits), particularly in internally fertilizing vertebrates. However, postcopulatory sexual selection within species can also drive trait divergence, resulting in reduced performance of heterospecific sperm within the female reproductive tract. Such incompatibilities, arising as a by-product of divergent postcopulatory sexual selection in allopatry, can represent reproductive barriers, analogous to species-assortative mating preferences. Here, we tested for postcopulatory prezygotic reproductive barriers between three pairs of taxa with diverged sperm phenotypes and moderate-to-high opportunity for postcopulatory sexual selection (barn swallows Hirundo rustica versus sand martins Riparia riparia, two subspecies of bluethroats, Luscinia svecica svecica versus L. s. namnetum, and great tits Parus major versus blue tits Cyanistes caeruleus). We tested sperm swimming performance in fluid from the outer reproductive tract of females, because the greatest reduction in sperm number in birds occurs as sperm swim across the vagina. Contrary to our expectations, sperm swam equally well in fluid from conspecific and heterospecific females, suggesting that postcopulatory prezygotic barriers do not act between these taxon pairs, at this stage between copulation and fertilization. We therefore suggest that divergence in sperm phenotypes in allopatry is insufficient to cause widespread postcopulatory prezygotic barriers in the form of impaired sperm swimming performance in passerine birds.

Indexed as

Cryptic female choicepostcopulatory prezygotic barrierssexual selectionspeciationsperm competitionsperm motilitysperm velocity

Identifiers

PMID26855769
PMCPMC4733106
OpenAlexW2270952320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.